I'd say he does bring pretty convincing arguments to the table and his logic does make sense.
if you take all the wealth and give it one group of people who don't put it back into the circulation but rather just invest it, it makes sense that there's no resources left for anyone else and "everyone" else is comparatively poor.
You know that when the public media and the elites start attacking him personally by attacking his credentials or his background or work history he's onto something. And this will happen because they cannot refute what he's saying with facts so they must try to silence by undermining his credibility.
Most forma of investing is putting the money back into circulation: After all, you are handing the money out to someone ao they use it. Just like giving out a business loan.
There is "investment" that doesn't cause more activity, like having a second home for speculation purposes that you keep empty. But in general, investment leads to more production, and ends up creating employment.
Putting aside his made-up backstory, which is admittedly ad hominem, I've listened to his arguments, notably his video on debt and mortgages. It falls into the same trap as a lot of broadly populist economics - demonization of morally neutral economic concepts and focusing only on one side of the equation. This[1] entire video is him focusing on the bank side of a mortgage transaction, while never once considering the value given to the mortgage owner in being able to purchase an asset they never would be able to otherwise and gaining equity. Investment isn't just a hole rich people dump money into that prints stuff out for them and no one else.
Call it biased, but I'm also a priori skeptical of any public intellectual that points to their one pet theory as the cause of society's ills.
I'd say he does bring pretty convincing arguments to the table and his logic does make sense.
if you take all the wealth and give it one group of people who don't put it back into the circulation but rather just invest it, it makes sense that there's no resources left for anyone else and "everyone" else is comparatively poor.